Can we have a general Trans thread?

[Brugmansia]

Sorry for another trans thread and I feel this is a bit of an imposition given I don't post really.

Anyway reading FWR over the past few months has re-radicalised me. I've been reading lots here and wider.

Anyway just now been watching TV and there's been some stuff that's given me the rage but didn't seem to fit in existing threads or it's own thread.

Anyway thing that gave me the rage.
On BBC3 program on transgemder teen's the doctor just said "creating a vagina". Are doctors redefining vagina as pocket rather than a passage? Makes me want to screem.

Also Sarah Ditum being no platformed.

So why should women be the ones to make room so that special provision could be made?

Some men also have a preference for personal care to be given by a man. That is their right. Actually any patient can refuse care from any HCP. They don't have to give a reason.

slow I would think 800 people would warrant building a new prison for transgendered people, or adapting an existing one. I think this has just happened in Italy. I would think that would be the ideal solution.

Not at all. Just suggesting an alternative dilemma - a patient requesting a doctor of her own race (albeit a fairly easy one to resolve in the UK of 2015). In the early 1960s - it was rather different.

Given that we've tried to respond to your questions and statements, I would like to see you taking to Twitter, Tumblr and the like and telling trans activists to be nice and not threaten 'TERFS' with rape and death, please. It's only fair.

Yes, but the special provision for everyone shouldn't be, "bung them in with the women, then the TW will be safe. Who give a fuck if the women are". What about gay men in prison, snitches, debtors? The very vulnerable are housed on Rule (or they were when I worked with offenders).

Perfectly happy with additional safe spaces for TW, who are attacked and treated horribly. Those safe spaces needn't be my safe spaces.

I would like to think I have enough autonomy over my body that I could refuse to have anyone touch me that I was uncomfortable with. As it happens I've been medically examined by men and women of varying ethnicities, nationalities and ages, doesn't bother me in the slightest what they look like as long as they're competent enough to do their job.
However, I'm an atheist and thanks the gods have never been raped. If I was extremely religious or had been raped, should I have the right to demand a woman who is biologically female to examine me? Would that give me the right to refuse someone, regardless of their rights as an employee? What if I was just a little religious or had 'only' been groped? Would that be an acceptable enough reason?

Why are you talking about 'special provision'? The current guidelines are that anyone who is legally female will be housed in the women's estate and anyone who identifies as female (but is not legally female) can be housed in the women's estate subject to individual consideration of circumstances at case conference. This does not require any 'special provision', it only requires that transgender prisoners (those who are legally female and those whose requests are acceded to at case conference) are housed in the women's estate. What seems to be being proposed, not only in relation to prisons (where the figure of 800 is pertinent) but in every sphere is to overturn current guidelines in favour of pure self-determination.

That means the end of sex segregated wards in hospitals, it means the end of sex segregated changing rooms, it means the end of being able to ask to see a health professional of a particular sex (and have your request accepted as reasonable), and so forth...

Actually any patient can refuse care from any HCP. They don't have to give a reason

A patient can refuse to accept treatment from a specific ethnic group but NHS may treat that as a refusal of treatment full stop.

Actually any patient can refuse care from any HCP. They don't have to give a reason

I wasn't aware of that. In that case any woman is perfectly within her existing rights to refuse a gynaecological exam from someone they suspected of being a TW.

In any case, I am sure The Daily Fail would soon let us know exactly where there was a TW gynaecologist or HCP.

'patients who have said "I don't want to be touched by a Paki doctor"'

Oh yes. Because women wanting the person sticking fingers or a metal device into their vaginas not to be male is exactly like ignorant racism

So if we can protect the rights of racist patients, I'm sure we can do the same for guaranteed women.

Slow do you really think a woman requesting a female doctor to do a smear is the same as your racist example? Really, actually? Because I feel like we aren't talking the same language then.

Actually, a patient has the right to decline care by any one, including on racist grounds. The alternative is treatment without consent, which of course is not acceptable - even for racists.

What the patient doesn't have the right to is treatment by a practitioner of a particular ethnicity or sex. We have this quite commonly in maternity, that women prefer female doctors. Sometimes that is easy to accommodate (a lot of obstetricians are female) sometimes it is less easy to accommodate. Sometimes women are told that their preference means they will have to wait longer or that they might be unable to get an epidural (for example if the anaesthetist on is male) or that safety might be compromised.

I don't regard women's preference for female practitioners as the same at all as a white patient's preference for white practitioners. For one thing.... reverse sexism is not a thing! So, you'd have to compare it to someone oppressed on the axis of 'race' having a preference for a practitioner similarly oppressed. I can see that in some scenarios this might actually be reasonable and relevant. (Example, victims of racially motivated crimes might feel more willing to report to police officers who have also experienced racism....)

Are you attempting humour?

I don't know what you mean by "guaranteed women" or what you think racism has anything to do with a woman's perfectly reasonable wish to be gynaecologically examined only by another female.

According to transgender activists trying to coerce women into accepting them, we can't use the term "biological woman" as it's offensive to those that were born with a wee-wee between their legs.

It's a non-issue, Cote, you can refuse treatment from any HCP without needing to give a reason. If you suspect them to be TW or a man, you can request someone else.

Lass I suppose that's possible. We just used to tell them they'd have to wait until someone of their preferred ethnicity became available. Their loss.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/10855575/Racist-couple-demanded-white-doctor.html

The NHS has in the past accepted racist reasons for rejecting treatment by a specific ethnic group. I would not count on that as a universal right.

So you are comparing a woman requesting another woman to perform intimate procedures to a racist, because you haven't said otherwise, just repeated yourself and then stated it's a non issue. So a rape victim requesting a born/biological/assigned-at-birth woman to perform a smear test is the same as a racist asking for a white nurse?

Guaranteed woman was used by a pp

"we can't use the term "biological woman""

"Biological woman" redundant Newspeak. The term "woman" is perfectly adequate on its own, as per its dictionary definition: adult human female.

... where female means: of the sex that can bear offspring or lay eggs that can be fertilised by male sperm.

I used that term. Because I have no idea how to write or speak any more. Biological fe/male isn't OK, born a... isn't OK, the asterixes seem to have died a death, I'm not using cis so can't say non-cis (FFS). I want someone with an actual vagina to deal with my actual vagina.

Please Slow could you answer the question?

No its not the same and I apologise if the use of that example is offensive. I honestly thought racist patients would told where to go. But the good news about my use of that example is that I have now learned that the risk of a woman being examined by TW is lower than we thought.

The question being "if I want a woman to do my smear, am I as bad as an ignorant racist?".